Minimum

Minimum is a 2014 third-person shooter that remains surprisingly demanding at high resolutions, and the data for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti combo shows a system that is firmly entry-level for modern 4K play but capable at 1080p. Benchmark results indicate this pairing sits near the bottom of the database, ranking 2525 out of 2939 tested combos, placing it in the 14th percentile of all system configurations. The GTX 1660 Ti, with its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory and 192-bit bus, is the clear performance limiter at every setting tier, while the Core Ultra 5 245, a 14-core Arrow Lake processor with a 5.10 GHz boost clock, provides more than enough headroom to avoid becoming a bottleneck in this title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's rank of 2525 out of 2939 tested configurations places it in the bottom 15% of all systems in the database for Minimum. This is a low standing, and the data supports that conclusion: at the most demanding preset (4K Ultra), the system averages just 22 FPS, which is below playable thresholds. The ranking reflects a fundamental imbalance—the GPU is a legacy Turing part from 2019, while the CPU is a current-generation desktop chip from 2025. The gap between the two components is substantial, and the game's performance ceiling is entirely dictated by the graphics card.

Looking at the individual component percentiles, the CPU is a strong performer. The Core Ultra 5 245 sits in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48,995. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G (49,196, 0.4% faster), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228, 0.5% faster), and the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H (48,698, 0.6% slower). The deltaPct values are tight, all within 1% of each other, indicating the Ultra 5 245 is competitively positioned among high-end desktop and workstation chips. The GPU, conversely, is in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7,723. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 540 (7,673, 0.7% slower), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580, 1.9% slower), and AMD Radeon R7 250 (7,557, 2.2% slower). This places the GTX 1660 Ti in low-end territory, roughly equivalent to entry-level workstation cards.

The combination of a top-decile CPU with a low-mid-range GPU results in the low overall rank. In Minimum, the CPU's potential is never fully utilized because the GPU cannot keep up with frame rendering at higher settings. The rank of 2525 is a direct consequence of this GPU bottleneck; the system would rank much higher if paired with a more modern graphics card. The data shows that for this specific game, the CPU is not the limiting factor—the GPU is, and the rank reflects that hardware reality.

FAQ

Q: What is the best performance this combo can achieve in Minimum?

A: The highest average FPS recorded is 131 at 1920x1080 with Low settings. This is the only configuration that exceeds 120 FPS, making it the target for high-refresh-rate monitors at 1080p.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming in Minimum?

A: Yes, but only at Low settings, where it averages 45 FPS. At Medium settings, the average drops to 35 FPS, at High it is 29 FPS, and at Ultra it falls to 22 FPS. None of the 4K presets maintain a consistent 60 FPS.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 Ti compare to its nearest competitors?

A: The GTX 1660 Ti has an average benchmark score of 7,723. It is 0.7% faster than the AMD Radeon 540 (7,673), 1.9% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580), and 2.2% faster than the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7,557). The differences are minor, so performance among these cards is similar.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 a high-end CPU?

A: Yes, it is in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 48,995, which is within 0.8% of the Intel Core i5-14600K (48,618) and within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (49,228).

Q: What is the FPS difference between Low and Ultra settings at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings yield an average of 84 FPS, while Ultra settings yield 41 FPS. That is a 43 FPS drop, or roughly 51% lower performance, when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: What is the limiting component for this combo in Minimum?

A: The GPU is the limiting component. The GTX 1660 Ti's 6 GB VRAM and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, while the CPU's performance metrics (e.g., Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,924) are well above what this game requires.

Resolution Scaling

The FPS data shows a clear and predictable scaling pattern as resolution increases. At 1080p with High settings, the system averages 84 FPS. Moving to 1440p at the same settings drops the average to 54 FPS, a 30 FPS reduction. At 4K, the average falls to 29 FPS, which is a 55 FPS reduction from 1080p. This scaling pattern—roughly halving performance from 1080p to 4K—is classic GPU-bound behavior. The CPU is not the constraint because the frame rate drops proportionally with pixel count, indicating that the graphics card's fill rate and memory bandwidth are the determining factors.

The Low settings preset shows a similar but less severe trend. At 1080p Low, the system hits 131 FPS. At 1440p Low, it drops to 84 FPS, and at 4K Low, it falls to 45 FPS. The 4K Low result is particularly telling: it is 86 FPS lower than the 1080p Low result, but it is still playable. This suggests that the GTX 1660 Ti has enough raw compute to handle the game at 4K when visual effects are minimized, but it cannot sustain high quality settings.

The resolution scaling also highlights the VRAM limitation. At 4K, the 6 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is likely saturated at higher quality presets, which is why the drop from Medium (35 FPS) to High (29 FPS) is steeper than the drop from Low (45 FPS) to Medium (35 FPS). The data indicates that the GPU's memory subsystem is a bottleneck at 4K, as the performance degradation accelerates as settings increase. At 1080p, the scaling is smoother, with a 31 FPS drop from Low to Ultra (131 to 64 FPS), suggesting the VRAM is less of a constraint at lower resolutions.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system's performance is solid across all presets. Low settings deliver an average of 131 FPS, which is excellent for competitive play. Medium settings average 100 FPS, with a minimum of 85 FPS and a maximum of 115 FPS, indicating stable frame times. High settings average 84 FPS, still above the 60 FPS threshold. Ultra settings average 64 FPS, which is playable but shows a significant drop from Low. The 1080p results show a 67 FPS spread between the lowest and highest quality presets.

At 2560x1440, the performance becomes more demanding. Low settings average 84 FPS, which is identical to the 1080p High result, showing that the resolution increase negates the quality improvement. Medium settings average 65 FPS, with a minimum of 55 FPS and a maximum of 74 FPS. High settings average 54 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target. Ultra settings average 41 FPS, making it marginal for smooth gameplay. The 1440p results show a 43 FPS spread between Low and Ultra.

At 3840x2160, the system struggles to maintain playable frame rates at higher presets. Low settings average 45 FPS, which is playable but not ideal. Medium settings average 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS and a maximum of 40 FPS, showing tight but low frame times. High settings average 29 FPS, and Ultra settings average 22 FPS. Both High and Ultra are below 30 FPS, making them effectively unplayable for a third-person shooter. The 4K results show a 23 FPS spread between Low and Ultra, with the most significant drop occurring between High (29 FPS) and Ultra (22 FPS).

GPU Role

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti is the primary performance driver in this combo, and the data shows it is the limiting factor at all resolutions above 1080p. The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base clock is 1500 MHz, boosting to 1770 MHz. These specifications are from the Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm process with 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die. The GPU's FP32 performance is 5.437 TFLOPS, and it has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs.

In Minimum, the GPU's 6 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p at all settings, as evidenced by the playable frame rates. However, at 4K, the VRAM capacity and bandwidth become a constraint. The 4K Medium result of 35 FPS, with a minimum of 30 FPS, suggests the GPU is hitting memory limits, as the performance does not scale linearly with resolution. The 4K Ultra result of 22 FPS is particularly poor, indicating that the GPU's compute units are overwhelmed by the combination of high resolution and high-quality effects.

The GTX 1660 Ti's percentile ranking of 41st places it below the median GPU. Its nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon 540 (0.7% slower) and Intel Arc A310 (2.3% slower), are all entry-level parts. This is consistent with the measured results: the GPU can deliver 60+ FPS at 1080p with medium settings, but it cannot handle 4K with high-quality presets. The pixel rate of 84.96 GPixel/s and texture rate of 169.9 GTexel/s are the theoretical limits that explain the 4K performance collapse. The data shows that for Minimum, the GTX 1660 Ti is best suited to 1080p gaming, with 1440p being a stretch at medium quality, and 4K only viable at low settings.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is a high-end desktop processor that is vastly more powerful than what Minimum requires. The CPU has 14 cores and 14 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It is built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, providing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and includes 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

The CPU's benchmark scores are decisive: it ranks in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 32,924, and its single-core score is 4,648. In PassMark, it scores 38,706 in multithread and 4,394 in single-thread. These numbers show exceptional compute capability. However, in Minimum, the CPU's role is minimal because the GPU is the bottleneck. The measured FPS data shows no signs of CPU limitation—frame rates scale with resolution and settings in a way that is purely GPU-bound.

The CPU's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 (0.5% faster) and Intel Core i5-14600K (0.8% faster), all have similar average scores, but none of these differences manifest in Minimum's frame rates because the game does not stress the CPU. The 14 cores and 14 threads are more than sufficient for this title, and the 5.10 GHz boost clock ensures that even single-threaded game logic runs without issue. The CPU's integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, are irrelevant for this combo since the discrete GPU is active. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 5 245 provides no performance ceiling in Minimum, and any frame rate improvements would require a GPU upgrade, not a CPU upgrade.